sculpt_deactivate

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

With no annotations, the description must disclose behavioral traits. It only states the action without mentioning prerequisites (e.g., object must be in sculpt mode), side effects, or whether sculpting data is preserved.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is very concise (one sentence, 6 words). While not verbose, it sacrifices necessary information. It earns a 3 because it is not bloated but is under-specified.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Given the simplicity (one parameter, output schema exists), the description is incomplete. It fails to explain the parameter or the tool's behavior. The existence of an output schema does not compensate for the lack of parameter guidance.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

The schema has 0% description coverage for the sole parameter 'obj'. The description does nothing to explain what 'obj' means (e.g., object name, selection string) or its constraints. This leaves the agent guessing.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description clearly states the action ('deactivates sculpting mode') and the target ('for an object'). It distinguishes from the sibling 'sculpt_activate'. However, it lacks further context about what deactivating entails.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'sculpt_activate' or 'sculpt_iterate'. The context is implied by the name, but explicit usage conditions are absent.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.